Kyle Stallock and I go over Dragon Age's quirkiness, the "state" of Rockstar, being immersed in games, and whether or not there is some objective measure of a game's success (then implying that you can make marked "improvements").

SOCOM is supported by the Navy Seals. America's Army is funded by the U.S. Army. Modern Warfare 2 has one scene involving civilians, and stands alone in having civilians at all in a war game. Should we be making war games with actual Mature content?

The discussion surrounding videogames as art is a tired one we would all like to forget. But Roger Ebert is insistent, and perhaps rightly so, to continue the debate. I'm just not sure he understands the field he is criticizing.

Kotaku proffered that there is a lack of virtual female soldiers in video games chiefly because it's too much work to create the extra models needed to display female counterparts. I argue that it's a real world issue, and explore the deeper question.

Let's halt for a second and reflect on what story offers a videogame -- can it be damaging? What are good videogame stories? Are games with stories good because of the stories? Do we even need them? I have no idea, but I'd like to talk about it more.